I enjoyed the film, I thought it was a good adaptation, although I couldn't help but think that there was too much emphasis on relationships and not enough on Horcruxes. I know the Ginny/Harry relationship wasn't represented all that well, but honestly, I think the film focuses too much on Lavender, Ron and Hermione and not enough on what is really important- namely Harry's searching for the Horcruxes in DH. I can't help but think that if Harry was only shown what Dumbledore shows him in the film, then he would have been searching for the Horcruxes for centuries without a clue of how to find them.

That's just me though- I can be quite nitpicky

__________________
I don't need you to respect me, I respect me
I don't need you to love me, I love me
But I want you to know, you could know me
If you change your mind

I voted E though I hesitated with voting D. But there was too many things I disliked throughout the movie. First, without comparing to the book, I found the editing too jerky. I know it's probably because of the amount of information thay had to give in 2 hours but it was a little annoying, it felt a little not natural. The scenes were short and there was almost no transition between them.

I was also disappointed because the movie only featured two moments from Voldemort's past and evolution while it was what I thought was the most interesting aspect in the book.

About the final battle, I agree that it was missing. Why did Malefoy bother doing its experiments throughout the year (by the way, these scenes were not very subtile) if the people who came through it did nothing except breaking some windows? It didn't make sense.

I didn't really like the story of the Half-Blood Prince so I was not very disappointed that it was downplayed in the movie. But since it is the title, it would have been consistent that Snape gets more exposure than just the vow and the end.

I was not too annoyed by the love relationship aspect except that the "lace" scene between Harry and Ginny was quite embarassing to watch.

The positive points are the sceneries and how beautiful the movie looked.
I read some reviews which said that there was not enough action but I thought it was okay. The scene in the cave with Dumbledore which I was waiting for was really good.
The actors who played Riddle were good and were credible in playing the same person at different ages. Their look was consistent with the Riddle from movie 2.

Finally about the Horcruxes, I really hope that they will take advantage of the fact that the last book will be adapted in two movies and develop this plot.

To conclude, I would say that I found the movie a little artificial. But I knew this book would be one of the hardest to adapt since there are so many plots inside it which do not actually meet: love relationships, Voldemort's past/Horcruxes and Half-Blood Prince/Snape/Malefoy.

It makes total sense that Dumbledore isn't around more. You know why? Because half the book is preoccupied with where he is and what he's doing.

Honestly, I'd have been bored stiff if the horcrux memories had been included (I find them boring in the books too).

Most of the burrow stuff was totally stupid. Not only does the Lupin-Tonks relationship come out of left field, the scene between Ginny and Harry on the stairs is almost farcical. While performing an action that says "I'm the mommy you never had, Harry", the way Ginny has been positioned in relation to Harry is both loaded and ludicrous. Gag. When Harry runs out into the field after Trix, it's like he didn't learn from Sirius's death or the confrontation with Trix at the ministry at all.

I can say that I enjoyed it though, and it will be better than the Hallows movies (HBP is just a better book, technically speaking).

After thinking over the HPB and why I just wasn't that impressed with it, it seemed to me that it started off all wrong. The scene that was supposed to be, I guess, a connection between the end of OotP and HBP, with Harry and Dumbledore standing there and flashes going off all around them, then Harry in the restaurant, and then Dumbledore in the train station....they were like scenes just thrown in. I thought later, "why didn't they use the scene where Fudge meets with the Prime Minister and introduces the new Minister of Magic. They could have used that as a brief narration, doing a voice-over while showing the bridge collapse and some other ways that Voldemort's followers were causing havoc in the non-wizarding world.

Like I've said several times before, I didn't dislike the film. It just wasn't what I was expecting.

__________________

I held you in my arms, although I knew that death
Had already taken you. I held you close, hoping for a faint heartbeat or breath
To prove me wrong.
But, you were still, and could not hear or see
My grief, my tears, my heartbreak knowing that the rest of my life would be
Spent without you.

Okay. I voted for C.
The film did not bore me. And not the I disliked the film, but, some parts are wrong. They started on the wrong foot, you know.
Bothers me a lot.
=_=
It wa daaamn NAYCE.
Tsk. I still prefer the books, tho.

IT JUST WASNT WHAT I EXPECTED ;||

__________________

"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." - Albus Dumbledore

I held you in my arms, although I knew that death
Had already taken you. I held you close, hoping for a faint heartbeat or breath
To prove me wrong.
But, you were still, and could not hear or see
My grief, my tears, my heartbreak knowing that the rest of my life would be
Spent without you.

You know, I think Mr Yates could focus this movie in two different ways: 1) a hunt-for-the-dark-wizard movie with a teen love subplot to release tension and provide some humour; 2) a teen love movie wiht a bit of action and mystery to make it tasty. Mr Yates chose number 2, what, IMO, is a great mistake. First, it's not what the book is about (though I won't deny there's plenty of it). Second, it interrupts the main plot of the series (which, but for the last half an hour, is almost anecdotic in this film). Third, HBP is the book where Voldemort stops being just a villain to become a complex, three-dimensional character, but the only Yates gives us is that he was already weird and twisted when he was a boy; what a waste of material... Fourth, he can't make five great first minutes about war and terror to bore us later with an hour and a half of "who's snogging who" (well, I'm probably a bit prejudiced... I acknowledge I have no patience with teen love stories).

In a more personal note, since he completely ignores the final battle at Hogwarts and Tonks and Lupin's relationship (not the fact that it exists, but the fact that it's complex), he deprives us of Tonks's hysterical fit at the Hospital Wing, which is my favourite scene in the whole book. And that's something I can't forgive.

Well, it wasn't as horrible as it looks by my words, I admit that I laughed a lot; but the real thing is that I expected a very different movie. In any case, I would save the scene at the Hospital Wing after Ron's poisoned: the adults' faces (Snape's, specially) when Lavender gets her tantrum are wonderful.

Third, HBP is the book where Voldemort stops being just a villain to become a complex, three-dimensional character, but the only Yates gives us is that he was already weird and twisted when he was a boy; what a waste of material...

Thinned out though the Tom backstory was in the film, I really don't see how it differs from the book.

The Gaunt backstory tells us nothing about Voldemort's character, other than that he sprang from a family who were, basically, bonkers. Which pretty much undermines the author's whole point about choice. It was better cut, IMO. The Hepzibah Smith memory was axed, but that only showed that Tom was a smooth, plausible and ruthless villain, which the flashback to Tom with Slughorn did very well.

How does the book show us a Young Tom who was anything other than weird and twisted?

How does the book show us a Young Tom who was anything other than weird and twisted?

Not really, but it did give him some kind of parallel with Harry. That's mainly what was missing IMO, the contrast between these two young orphans. I don't think we needed to see the Gaunts or that old woman, but I think there were a lot of times when a little more discussion between Harry and Dumbledore would have made those memories more meaningful. Honestly they were kind of throwaway, the first one was never talked about and had nothing to do with horcruxes (beyond the cave teaser) and the second was just a way of confirming something Dumbledore seemed to suspect already. They were just sort of...there. I just think they could have done more than just show us Riddle being like the kid from The Omen.

Not really, but it did give him some kind of parallel with Harry. That's mainly what was missing IMO, the contrast between these two young orphans. I don't think we needed to see the Gaunts or that old woman, but I think there were a lot of times when a little more discussion between Harry and Dumbledore would have made those memories more meaningful. Honestly they were kind of throwaway, the first one was never talked about and had nothing to do with horcruxes (beyond the cave teaser) and the second was just a way of confirming something Dumbledore seemed to suspect already. They were just sort of...there. I just think they could have done more than just show us Riddle being like the kid from The Omen.

For me the outstanding perfomance turned in by Tom Felton as Draco makes you realize how far the younger cast members have come over the years as actors. Of course he has the most tortured character to work with in the movie with the possible exception of Dumbeldore. Dumbeldore who after all must face his failure in recognizing the danger in the young Tom Riddle, and did not manage to reach his heart as young boy while there was still time.

Thinned out though the Tom backstory was in the film, I really don't see how it differs from the book.

The Gaunt backstory tells us nothing about Voldemort's character, other than that he sprang from a family who were, basically, bonkers. Which pretty much undermines the author's whole point about choice. It was better cut, IMO. The Hepzibah Smith memory was axed, but that only showed that Tom was a smooth, plausible and ruthless villain, which the flashback to Tom with Slughorn did very well.

How does the book show us a Young Tom who was anything other than weird and twisted?

Well I thought the movie did well with it - but I would agree with the other poster to some degree because I don't feel that the purposeful charming, alluring and integrating Tom the book told of was brought out in the movie. That helps to explain why so many fell in with the 'weird and twisted' boy - because otherwise, why would they, unless they too were all werid and twisted and some were not, imo, although granted, many of the DEs and Voldy supporters were.

On the other hand I am not sure many movie goers would much care why any one joined up, so it probably won't make any difference to the movie that they didn't fully round out Tom's character. Also, for moviegoers that recall Chamber of Secrets (or even saw it for that matter), they may recall the charming spirit Tom that Harry met - but generally dependence on movies presented that long before for small points such as this is not adequate, imo. So I agree that Tom was not as rounded out as in the book, but I don't think it hurt the film.

On another note, I thought the performances of young Harry, Draco, Ron and Hermione were done very well also. But I have always liked the way the young actors portrayed their characters from the start.

You know, I think Mr Yates could focus this movie in two different ways: 1) a hunt-for-the-dark-wizard movie with a teen love subplot to release tension and provide some humour; 2) a teen love movie wiht a bit of action and mystery to make it tasty. Mr Yates chose number 2, what, IMO, is a great mistake. First, it's not what the book is about (though I won't deny there's plenty of it). Second, it interrupts the main plot of the series (which, but for the last half an hour, is almost anecdotic in this film). Third, HBP is the book where Voldemort stops being just a villain to become a complex, three-dimensional character, but the only Yates gives us is that he was already weird and twisted when he was a boy; what a waste of material... Fourth, he can't make five great first minutes about war and terror to bore us later with an hour and a half of "who's snogging who" (well, I'm probably a bit prejudiced... I acknowledge I have no patience with teen love stories).QUOTE]

IMO there should have been a lot less of "who's snogging who" and a lot more of "did anyone we know get killed?"

The tension that is built up in HBP, I feel, is suppose to set up what's coming in DH. The reason for the building up of the tension...the fear....is the increase in deaths and disappearances of members of the wizarding community and outright attacks on the muggle world. It sets up the "who's next" scenario that I feel is important as Harry, Hermoine, and Ron travel around looking for the Horcruxes. It's the fear that anyone or anything could be an "extension" of Voldemort. Like the diner scene, where they are tracked down because one of them says Voldemort's name. The most innocent-seeming things can be the most dangerous, and that is part of the whole atmosphere of DH.

The book is great. If the director just follows it. Why am I not hopeful, though. Mmmmm, burning of the Burrow, reading wizard newspapers in muggle restaurants, no Battle of the Astronomy Tower.....need I go on????

__________________

I held you in my arms, although I knew that death
Had already taken you. I held you close, hoping for a faint heartbeat or breath
To prove me wrong.
But, you were still, and could not hear or see
My grief, my tears, my heartbreak knowing that the rest of my life would be
Spent without you.

I loved the movie it's one of my favorites of the series but I don't like the last 15 minutes or so. I felt like the movie fell flat on its face from DD and Harry returning from the cave to the end of the movie. DD not petrifying Harry under the cloak, which leads to Snape seeing him and doing the Shh. No mini battle as everyone is escaping and last but not least the last scene with Harry, Hermione....and Oh yea Ron was there. Kind of hard to tell when he doesn't say a word. Also the quick jump from talking about DD to then bringing up Ron being OK with Harry/Ginny

After thinking over the HPB and why I just wasn't that impressed with it, it seemed to me that it started off all wrong. The scene that was supposed to be, I guess, a connection between the end of OotP and HBP, with Harry and Dumbledore standing there and flashes going off all around them, then Harry in the restaurant, and then Dumbledore in the train station....

While they did deviate from the book I personally found these to be some of the better scenes, especially the opening scene because there were no words spoken but it was just charged with emotion especially the gesture from Dumbledore - it completely setup the relationship between DD and Harry and said it all in a single, comforting gesture.

B for me - good adaptation, hit many of the right notes and a couple of the scenes were so on key and memorable that even if the movie had been vastly inferior it still would've been an enjoyable experience.

My main gripes with the movie were:

- The Horcruxes weren't discussed or explained enough and there needed to be one additional memory of Voldemort's. I also felt a proper explanation of the prophecy, like in the book, should've come in these discussions.

- Harry/Ginny wasn't done appropriately for me. In the book it feels like these two are physically pulled together but in the movie it's more like Ginny being lecherous.

- Harry's positioning at DD's death; deviations are a part of movie adaptations, they're required in many cases and the three main cases are where the original scene is either: too costly to follow, too long or is simply cut. With DD's death scene Harry standing underneath had no reason that filled those criteria. They didn't save any time or much budget from this deviation from the book, and if anything it required more time because of the brief exchange with Snape - it was essentially pointless. The only possible thing I can think of is that somehow it'll be relevant to a scene in the DH movie.

- I would've liked to see SOME hint of a battle in Hogwarts at the end, they needn't have even shown it that much (since we miss most of it in the book's narration anyway) but at least shown the wake of it while Harry legs it through after Snape.

I didn't mind the Burrow Scene because even though it was irrelevant in a story context it was necessary in a cinema context - movie fans aren't the same as people who read books, they're used to be visually entertained almost constantly and the medium itself is considerably shorter with books taking days to read yet a movie being over in a couple of hours; this means an action scene near the middle of the book was needed and the Burrow Scene filled this slot.

Lastly, I loved Gambon's portrayal in this, I thought it was spot on and the Underground Lake scene was excellent.

I don't understand the people comoplaining about the roamnce in the movie. The book itself is heavy on romance, Harry doesn't get with Ginny until the last 3 chapter's or something like that. The love triangle between Ron, Lav, and Hermione goes on for awhile too.

I think they balance everything out just fine when it came to the romance and danger. I lovef this movie and plan on seeing it for the 5th time.

Other than this new seductive Ginny, I absolutely loved HBP. Best movie yet, IMO. The Burrow Scene was a bit unecassary, but that's just a misdemeanor in my book, not a felony.
Especially like the scene where Harry has just drank a bit of Felix. Hilarious!

I don't understand the people comoplaining about the roamnce in the movie. The book itself is heavy on romance, Harry doesn't get with Ginny until the last 3 chapter's or something like that. The love triangle between Ron, Lav, and Hermione goes on for awhile too.

I think they balance everything out just fine when it came to the romance and danger. I lovef this movie and plan on seeing it for the 5th time.

I can definitely agree with the people who complain about the romance though. Romance is fine but it felt like 2/3 of this movie was romance - at times it felt more like a RomCom than a HP movie.

Now the book HBP had alot of romance but it also had alot of discussion between Harry and Dumbledore to balance out that romance during the school year - the movie lacked that discussion and thus the balance was lost.

The book is great. If the director just follows it. Why am I not hopeful, though. Mmmmm, burning of the Burrow, reading wizard newspapers in muggle restaurants, no Battle of the Astronomy Tower.....need I go on????

The non moving wizard newspaper! even that annoyed me - It just emphasized to me that Yates has no concept of Harry Potter: He puts his own stuff in, for unknown reasons which don't fit.
Prime example is his decisions to leave in Harry taking DD's wand as a keep sake even though JKR told him he couldn't. And then having to change the scene when DH came out.